It is well known that ozone is useful as a disinfectant for killing bacteria, viruses and mold spores and rendering harmless contaminates that are on instrument, device surfaces and food products as well as contaminants which may be present in the air. There have been disclosures of the use of ozone in the treatment of wounds, and there are numerous publications, primarily in Europe, directed to the use of ozone in dental procedures to aid in healing of dental conditions.
One problem in working with ozonated water is that ozone dissolved in water rapidly decays to oxygen. Depending on the concentration of the ozone and the temperature of the water, the half-life (useful life) of the ozonated water can be from 3 days to as little as 30 minute; at elevated temperatures decomposition is more rapid. Therefore, ozone can not be readily bottled for extended storage and later use. Also, ozone is considered to be a toxic substance and inhalation or unintended skin contact can be harmful. It is therefore desirable to manufacture ozone, dissolve it in water and use the ozone/water composition, that is, bring it into contact with the dental surfaces to be treated, as quickly as possible and then decompose the excess or used ozone so that it does not create a health hazard. Further, it is desirable to reduce the amount of ozone that must be generated by maximizing the efficiency of dissolving the ozone that is generated into water for use in the decontamination process.
Bacteria that causes tooth decay is found deep within the tooth structure. Ozone is effective in the reduction of bacteria from tooth surfaces or around the gum line and is better and more effective than chlorine based disinfectants. Ozone also has value in tooth whitening as well as reducing tooth sensitivity, gum line pockets, gum line irritation, halitosis and has been shown to assist in the reversal of the decay process in shallow, initial cavities as well as infections deep within the root as part of endodontic procedures.
Since 1998 Professor Edward Lynch, Queen's Dental Hospital and Belfast University, Ireland, has been demonstrating the utility of ozone in dental procedures. It destroys organic effluents that are produced by these bacteria. By effectively sterilizing the lesion, minerals from the patient's own saliva then remineralizes the areas of mineral loss, also hardening the tooth. Once the tooth is hardened, it is more resistant to future bacterial attack and mineral loss.
Studies from Europe (Abu-Salem et al, 2003; Baysan and Lynch 2001; Holmes, 2003; Holmes and Lynch, 2003) have demonstrated that the use of ozone in dental care is effective as a non-destructive method to manage decay and its destructive effects. The effects of ozone reduce tooth destruction in routine procedures (Clifford, 2004; Holmes, 2004; Holmes and Lynch, 2004) and ozone reduces the time and the cost of dental care (Domingo and Holmes, 2004; Johnson et al, 2003). In Endodontics, ozone is effective against Enterococcus faecalis (Chang et al, 2003).
It is also known that water supply passageways, even for the supply of purified water, will develop a bacterial or fungal growth on their inner surfaces, referred to as a biofilm. For example, dental units used to supply rinse water to the mouth of a patient can often be contaminated unless particular efforts are made to disinfect and clean the water supply lines. Test show that, if not properly maintained, these water supply systems may have bacterial counts in excess of one million colony forming units of bacteria per millimeter of water (>1×106 CFU/ml). While bacterial counts in dental units are generally less then 1×106, they are usually far in excess of the American Dental Association recommended bacterial levels of below 200 CFU/ml in dental water supply systems. The source of the bacterial contamination may be the supply water or back splatter from the irrigation fluids sprayed into the patient's mouth. In spite of over 35 years of scientific and clinical studies worldwide, it is estimated over 30 percent of the dental units still use city water as a source. As a result, there are over 300,000 contaminated patient treatment sites in the US alone. Of further concern, even though certain dental units use bottles of sterile water is that they are often refilled with city water, defeating the intended purpose of using pre-bottled pure water. Still further some units allow the mounting of two bottles one of which is usually filled with city water. A further inadequate alternative is to use city water and add a decontaminating agent, such as silver iodide or other microbiocides, to each bottle of water. This may decontaminate the water but then the patients will also be exposed to the chemicals.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,857,436 to Labib et al discloses a method of cleaning small passageways in a fluid distribution system such as a dental water supply unit, endoscopes, biopsy devices, heat exchangers, micro-filtration, ultra-filtration, dialysis and reverse osmosis equipment. US Published Application 2006/0191849 to Garrison et al is directed to a method of cleaning a dental unit water system using a silver colloid, hydrogen peroxide composition.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,585,898 to Ekberg et al. is an example of a device for the production of water which includes dissolved ozone. The ozone generated by the use of a plasma resonance electrode is added to pure water by a combination of diffusion and injector technology. The system appears to recirculate the water solution until a desired ozone concentration is reached (1.5-2 ppm). One disclosed application is the cleaning or sterilization of a medical instrument. To do so a spray bottle is filled with the ozone-water mixture. Alternatively, ozone gas is feed into a contaminated, water filled container to decontaminate the container.
The need for a simple and effective method and system to prepare bottled ozonated water for various applications including, but not limited to, providing ozonated water for dental and medical procedures and decontamination of medical and dental devices as well as dental irrigation systems has clearly been shown. Previous devices or systems have not be found to be acceptable because they are too difficult to use, too large for use in dental or medical procedures or do not provide and effective treatment without leaving residual chemicals that may be detrimental to the patient.